PLAYBACK 24: Gallo Acoustics Reference Strada 5.1-Channel System
Revolutionary Looks and Sound
Home Theater/Multichannel Audio
- PLAYBACK 24: Gallo Acoustics Reference Strada 5.1-Channel System
- PLAYBACK 24: Pioneer Elite SC-27 THX Ultra2 Plus-Certified A/V Receiver
Portable/PC Audio
- Chordette Gem High Definition Bluetooth Decoder/USB DAC (Playback 24)
- PLAYBACK 24: Grado SR325is Headphones
TV / Displays
Two-Channel Audio
Source: Playback
SPECS & PRICING
Anthony Gallo Acoustics Reference Strada Side and Strada Center
Driver complement: One CDT 3 semi-cylindrical Kynar piezoelectric tweeter, two 4-inch carbon fiber diaphragm equipped mid bass drivers
Frequency response: 45Hz–20kHz, ± 3dB (speakers placed within 1 foot of walls)
Sensitivity: 87 dB
Impedance: 8 ohms
Dimensions (HxWxD): 13.5” x 5” x 7.5”
Weight: 11.4 lbs./each
Warranty: 5 years (if product registered within 60 days of purchase)
Price: $999/each
Tabletop Stands & Wall-Mount Brackets for Reference Strada Side & Center speakers: $125/each
Floor Stands for Reference Strada Sides: $450/pair
Anthony Gallo Acoustics TR-3 powered subwoofer
Driver complement: One 10-inch long-throw woofer with ceramic-enhanced aluminum diaphragm
Integrated amplifier power: 300W, Class A/B
Dimensions (HxWxD): 12” x 10.75” x13.5”
Weight: 36 lbs./each
Warranty: 1 year (2 years if product registered within 60 days of purchase)
Price: $984.50/each
System Price: $6964 as tested
ANTHONY GALLO ACOUSTICS
www.roundsound.com
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Comments
While I appreciate the quality of sound I can't justify the HUGE difference in price for this 5.1 system. For around $7K there are a miriad of choices and this Gallo system wouldn't even make the top 10 list at that price. Your article highlights the bias in the audio world toward placating to the audio companies and your unwillingness to put out an open and honest review for fear of hurting your precious relationshps with those manufacturers. Please... $7k for this system is a huge waste of money. Gallo needs to come down to earth like so many of the other so called or self professed high end audio manufacturers.
I always feel like I'm walking through Monster Cables galleria when I see reviews such as these, trying to knock the apparant ignorance of audio and home theater buyers when they make statements that their tech is "revolutionary". So I see, "Enclosures are loaded with Gallo’s proprietary S2 damping materials, which have the effect of making the speakers’ compact cabinets perform as if they were larger than, in fact, they really are." And that is any different than say the normal fiberfill stuffing that goes into almost 100% of non Gallo speakers and subwoofers? A simple read up on speaker building 101 tells us thats the normal job of fiberfill, which runs some $2.50 a pound. Seriously, you wanna pull bull with me, at least make me feel your tech is somehow better, not just the same as everyone else, i.e. show how the tech is better, maybe more efficient? I'm no price hater but I hate when my intelligence is underminded. What exactly am I getting for my $7k?
I love that there are so many here passionate about sound, music, and the gear required to convey the emotional impact of same. I wish so many didn't start their comments with "Please....." as if to dismiss another human being's comments or reviews. Very antagonistic! Not going to win many to your point of view let alone provide a friendly place for exchange of ideas. BTW, there are devices and materials by respected companies such as SEAS which will "trick" drivers into "thinking" they are in a much larger enclosure than they are. Spun stainless steel would be heavy, rigid, less resonant, and expensive than other materials. If you don't want to spend $7K that's fine. Gallo is not buying off the shelf components, slapping them together in a traditional "monkey coffin" design and asking to be compared to others almost exactly like it. He's using innovation to get closer to an ideal. That he's offering it for $7k is not expensive. If you've not heard them, don't understand the benefits of each individual component, their cumulative result, let alone the cost for R&D, manufacturing, markup and the like, how can anyone say whether they're worth $7K. They may be, they may not. But many of the comments made here are surely judgements based on a very limited base of knowledge.
$7k is not expensive for a real quality surround system. If this system sounds anywhere close to the quality of the previous reference systems, it will be a huge accomplishment to have put that level of near audiophile sound quality into a small lifestyle package.
Have you heard these speakers? I think not.
is 'AmFuzzy' short for "My thinking is fuzzy"? What exactly are you comparing the Gallo system to? Have you HEARD it? And please name some of systems that DO make your top ten list. BTW, have you heard all of those, or just read the price tags?
In short, do you have ANY idea at all what you're talking about? Gallo speakers have historically provided VERY high value at a relatively modest price. And $7K is not a ridiculous price for a surround system that actually makes music. You say that you "appreciate the quality of sound". From what you've written here, I beg to differ. That obviously does not mean that same thing to you as it does to me.
I am really tired of people who have no clue, but love to rant.
If you can't hear the difference between the Gallos and a Bose 'lifestyle system'... or you think all cables sound the same... or you simply care more about cost than sound quality... that's fine. Nobody's trying to change you. Live and let live; Each to his own!
But please understand that you're ranting to the wrong crowd. We CAN hear the difference, we CARE about sound quality, and we're willing to pay a few $$ to get it. To us, you sound like just another guy who doesn't get it, has never heard it, or simply CAN'T. You might as well be trying to convince atronomers that the earth is flat.
I've heard a stereo variant of this system - Stradas + Sub - and it gives you a serious taste of high end performance. Given the $7k price tag for the entire system, I think "AmFuzzy" is probably unfamiliar with reference quality sound and therefore has no cogent value system to apply to this. I'm actually going to buy a Strada system for our AV room, given what I've heard from the stereo setup. This is actually an astonishing accomplishment at the price.
AmFuzzy - do yourself a favor and get some real reference mileage under your tires before you make such extreme value judgements. From your criticism about the price vs. performance, you're clearly WAY out of your depth.
C
Oh please, I'm sure he's as familiar with reference sound as anyone else can be, he's just not enthralled with a 7k setup that doesnt appear to offer any particular highlights other than name, aesthetics, and price. Please do not resort to dismissing his comment by your ignorance to what he knows/does not know. Bercause one doubts the merits of such a setup, doesnt mean they dont go to their local high end audio joint and sit with a few good discs and listen and judge and so on. I've ordered enough try before buy deals and been to enough shows and listenings that I'm very familiar with the way acoustics should sound. And primarily, I know audio is like your favourite colour. It is and you cant explain it. Now explain to me why the $200 Levis are better than the $30 ones at Wal-Mart?
Huge waste? Maybe not...I can think of several applications for this system based on size alone. A normal den that doubles as a theater room would be perfect. Large full range speakers are not the answer to every problem. Gallo has a good reputation and would be worth auditioning in any case. Keep an mind open and remember the universe does not revolved around your limited experience no matter who you are.
I personally own the gallo reference 3.1's. While I love the sound quality, they're not designed for loud volumes in a large room. 7k for a system that is a step below the 3.1's? The gallos can be had new for around 2500. Add in their adiva surrounds and an internet direct sub and you're under 5k, and are in a much better system. 7k is a huge chunk of change. The stradas will work in a medium to small media room, but will not fill a large room. My 3.1's don't even fill my large room(I run a separate amp and pre/pro with 200 watts/channel). And while I like the gallos, their subs suck. I bought one, brought it home, and took it back the next day. I then bought an av123 mfw 15 for $500, unbelievable for the price. Educate yourself, there is better equipment for much less if you're willing to look for it.
I personally own the gallo reference 3.1's. While I love the sound quality, they're not designed for loud volumes in a large room. 7k for a system that is a step below the 3.1's? The gallos can be had new for around 2500. Add in their adiva surrounds and an internet direct sub and you're under 5k, and are in a much better system. 7k is a huge chunk of change. The stradas will work in a medium to small media room, but will not fill a large room. My 3.1's don't even fill my large room(I run a separate amp and pre/pro with 200 watts/channel). And while I like the gallos, their subs suck. I bought one, brought it home, and took it back the next day. I then bought an av123 mfw 15 for $500, unbelievable for the price. Educate yourself, there is better equipment for much less if you're willing to look for it.
I also have Gallo ref 3.1's. I have an entire 7.1 ref 3.1 surround system. To the gentleman who
states that the ref 3.1's can't fill a large room that well....I have a 30'x17' room that they fill with ease. They will
play cleanly, at stupid loud volumes. Your amp may not be powerfull enough. As far as this review goes, and the 1st poster
saying they overpriced,....GO LISTEN. 1k for essentially what is an updated head unit of the ref3.1 IS NOT a rip off. Do not
judge them just because they are small. My ref 3.1's are small and will beat anything in their price range, overall, and compete/beat
many speakers costing more. I'll put my 7.1 system up against anything out there,and it would win (at same price range), and hold it's own pretty damn well
against others costing much more. Can it be beaten, OF COURSE, but not unless you spend A LOT more money. I too know what great sound is
and the Gallo's deliver overall, an amazing value (size bedamned) !!!
Mark
Just to add to my above post. I have 2 custom 15" subs doing bass duties, with a Velodyne sms1, NOT the Gallo subs.
Mark
Here is the bst part of the 3.1's...the sub is built in. I like that.
The sub coils can be driven by any active XO and amp.
I like the Gallo amps enough, but a different XO will give me the time alignment that I will need going to 5.1.
Behringer units are very useful for timing and delay, but a bit low on the quality chain when working with the Gallo line.
It is a consideration to seek out 3.1's on the Gon or elsewhere, if the 7k$ freaks you out.
Skistud, you have not heard the 3.1's under power in a GOOD large room.
My mate in Texas ran them with a modest 300 Mac7300 and one sub amp.
The meters could light up pretty steady and the music just kept coming.
Better amplification equals more volume before breakup, this is why speaker power numbers are a fallicy.
We also drove the Gallo's with mono 7300's one weekend and opened both amps.
The Gallos will play very very very loudly, and not drop a note. The bass driver just HAS to be JBL.
NOTES TO 'skistud07':
I absolutely agree that a better surround system would start with the Nucleus 3's in front. But the A'Diva satellites just won't do. Your rears s/b the Nucleus Reference AV's or the Strada's, or you're short-changing yourself. That adds another $1.5-2K to total cost, but well worth the upgrade and a MUCH better match fro the Nuke 3's.
Regarding the Nuke 3's and large rooms; I've heard them fill a 20' x 30' room with decibels to spare, so I have two possible suggestions:
1. The Nukes are not the easiest load for an amp - only 88db sensitivity and impedance of the bass drivers down to 4 ohms. Maybe that's why Gallo does not list 'recommended power' in the specs. (They do list power handling up to a whopping 350 Watts RMS!) So you might try giving them some more Watts and see if they open up and 'fill the room'.
2. Do you have the 'optional' subwoofer amp? In my mind, it's not exactly 'optional'. Those big side-firing bass drivers NEED the damping provided by the sub amp. It will tighten the bass, smooth out the midrange, expand the soundstage, and generally make your Nuke 3's sing.
I wrote earlier that Gallo is known for high value at modest prices, and the Nuke 3's are probably the best example of that. They rock! ... and they SHOULD be able to fill your large room with music.
Happy Listening!
If it's at all possible I'd like to see a head to head with Kef, Totem, Canton, Tanoy, Mordaunt-Short, PSB, Martin Logan ... to name but just a few of the many excellent surround set ups that are out there right now. Given the two subwoofer configuration (the proper way to do it) and the wonderful accolades you bestowed on the Gallo set up, I for one can't wait to go audition the system.
So we read again an equipment review that leaves us, the reader, in total limbo.
It sounds good? Well, how good in comparison with the others in the same class?
I am not so sure about the gain rec(mentioned several times).
Would the sensitivity of the other speakers not matter?
I have Gallo ref 3.1's, with sub amps in mono, so a center and 2 surrounds might just line up fine.
That means buying more Mac amps, of course...
Personally I can't financially justify the cost of this system. However, one ought not "discount" the qualities of a product because they personally cannot afford it. That's like saying a Porsche isn't a great car, because I can't afford to have one. These are two seperate issues.
If you can't financially justify something like an "expensive" HT speaker system, then consider a great sounding 2 channel system that you can use with a dvd player and tv. Rather that then a poor sounding HT system, just to get it all. This might be a case of less is more.
One thing about the cost....if you start with the Strada "satellites" and get ONE decent sub, you'll still have a heck of a system.
I owned Due's, and used them with a couple different subs to realy great effect. I'd go for the Strada's and pair them with a single decent sub (like the TR-1, which is under $500 IIRC). Now, for 1/2 to 1/3 the price of the Strada/dual-TR-3 system, you still have great sound, and you can expand later with upgraded and/or dual subs.
Having owned many of the Gallo's out there, and heard ALL but the polymer ball 4-speaker reference (and the Strada's), I can say it is some of the best sound I've heard.
I realized the $7k price is for the 5/2 system.....but other than 2.1 versus 5.2, my comments still apply :-)
You could do A'diva's for rears, too, and go fo rone sub.....just more food for thought.
Stewp, I say Bravo to your post. The only observation I'd add would is an individual's past listening experiences and personal taste must be considered . I spent 26 years in the military, several of which left me exposed to a variety of hazardous sound levels. That has changed the way that I hear and interpret sound sources.
To the gentleman who criticized the cost of the referenced system, I'd state the following: While the cost of a system may not be justifiable to some, "true audiphiles" who've spent a good amount of time performing "critical" listening test in a variety of environments (e.g., an anechoic chamber) would beg to differ. While I have been exposed to some high cost systems, and some pleasure was derived from the experience; I can state the damage done to my hearing prevented me from truly enjoying the experience.
That being said, I would probably not reach for an ultra expensive sound system (were I able to afford one), but rather something that would enable my "untrained" ear to appreciate whatever sound source I was using.
I'm interested to see the comments my review has sparked, and thought I would offer a few follow-on comments/qualifications.
Regarding supposed high-end bias, influence of advertisers, etc.
As near as I can tell, Gallo is a value-oriented company with a serious commitment to produce products that deliver legitimate high-end sound quality. I don't have any problem with products that perform above their price range. Do you?
For the record, Gallo does not presently advertise with AVguide.com/Playback (though we would of course welcome their advertising support in the future). My comments on the Reference Strada system--as with any product I review--are based purely on observations of the system's performance and familiarity with what other products in the same price class can do.
Is the Gallo Reference Strada Satellite merely the updated tweeter/midrange section of the Reference 3.1?
No, not exactly. The Reference Strada is in fact the tweeter/midrange section of the not-yet-released Gallo Reference 3.5 floorstanding speaker. Differences include an all-new CDT 3 tweeter, revised midrange enclosures, and a number of internal changes--all of which give the Reference Strada a significantly more open and transparent sound than the Reference 3/3.1 (to my ears, the difference isn't subtle).
Thoughts on the Gallo subs.
No, the Gallo sub is not the highest output woofer you could buy for the price. However, it is very well-damped and well-controlled, goes quite low, and--most importantly--offers enough resolution and transient speed to match well with the Reference Stradas, which are extremely open and agile. The Reference Stradas are not speakers that should be matched with giant, rumblin', bumblin', mud-flapper subs; they deserve better than that.
Note that the TR-3 sub uses the same woofer that will be found in the not-yet-released Reference 3.5 speaker--a woofer that represents an improvement on the design used in the Reference 3/3.1 (though omitting the dual-drive option that the Reference 3/3.1 provides, since the TR-3 of course has its own built-in amp).
Regarding S2 damping material.
Based on conversations I've had with Anthony Gallo, my understanding is that S2 material not only provides damping functions, but also alters the spring constant of the air within the speaker enclosures--and not merely be displacing air with its own volume. Is this different from what fiberfill, Dacron, long-fiber wool, and foam damping materials can do? Yes.
For a good primer on this subject, visit the KEF Web site and read the various white papers KEF offers on its own A.C.E. damping technology, which also works to change the spring constant of air, although it uses a different technical approach. I think the KEF papers will show readers how A.C.E. (and I would add, S2) differs, both in intent and achieved results, from traditional damping materials.
Gallo's Web site offers much less detail on S2 than the KEF site does on the A.C.E. system, so that I might never have known about the full range of S2's properties, but for the fact that I once had an opportunity to ask Anthony Gallo how his design approach differed from KEF's A.C.E. system in terms of trying to achieve "big sound from small enclosures." In the course of that conversation, Gallo explained S2's characteristics more fully than the Gallo Web site does, and mentioned that--like the A.C.E. system--S2 effectively changes the spring constant of air within the speaker enclosure. (He did not, however, choose to explain precisely how S2 achieves this result, as he regards the inner workings of S2 as something of a trade secret.).
Is the Reference Strada system a "lifestyle" system, or something more?
This is one of those moments where I get to pose two questions and then answer both with a "Yes." As I said near the beginning of the review, the Reference Strada system's styling can lead people--even very knowledgeable people--to mistake it for a toy. But in my eyes the Reference Strada system is a dead-serious high-end design that just happens to meet the unspoken rules of "lifestyle-ness:" compact dimensions, sleek and visually arresting good looks, reasonable prices, etc..
My suggestion: To really "get" this system, just ignore its appearance and focus your attention on what it does.
How good is the Reference Strada rig, really?
As I write this, I've just returned from the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest 2009, where the Reference Strada rig, set up with just one TR-3 sub, was on demonstration as a purist music system. For the record, I thought the system was sounding pretty good, but perhaps not quite as dialed-in as it had been in the Playback listening room. Even so, I heard attendees saying things like this: "I can't believe Gallo can get such a huge soundstage from such a small system," or "man, these Reference Stradas can do things I've not heard from speaker systems many times their price," etc., etc.
My point is simply this: the performance of the Reference Strada system certainly justifies consideration at its price point. The Gallos may not be your ultimate choice, since--as many readers have pointed out--this is a crowded market segment populated with many strong competitors. But, even if the Reference Stradas aren't your "cup of tea," I think I can safely say that hearing them will prove a worthwhile learning experience (and just plain fun).
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
Thanks Chris for a very diplomatic and thoughtful reply. Some nasty people out there.
For more info on the Strada and it's construction check out www.6moons.com. They have been providing very in depth reviews of the Gallo at least since the Ref 3.0. and have some great info on the 3.5 as well.
Chris,
your response seems very reasonable. I too believe that Gallo offers good value for the money, and that all of the Gallo systems offer what can be considered high value.
Regarding dampening material, all that is required is that it does as claimed. If it does, then there is some validity to the approach taken by a particular manufacturer. As I am not familiar with the Kef approach or Gallos, I thank you for the references to websites.
One ought not look at a system to hear it. This is a trick I learned many years ago. Shut off your lights and listen (ignoring arguments that a darkened room may reduce the introduction of EMI). When I sold audio, this was a great trick. Get someone to listen to a system that sounds great (without exposing that system to any light). Then turn on the lights. You'd be amazed how good a relatively inexpensive system can sound.
If we are to have any faith in reviewers and reviews, we must believe that advertising $s do not affect the outcomes of reviews---that is the only bias that needs to be taken for granted. Why else even bother to read reviews?
I've listened to the reference 3.1s extensively and thought they were truly awful. It seems to me that whenever a product such as this comes to the marketplace reviewers fall all over themselves heaping praises until the next iteration comes out and then the previous model in hindsight is flawed and not so great afterall. I see it all the time in audio equipment, cars etc. The Sub in either form is not competetive in the marketplace period and not just in volume capability. The satellites are better but like others have said, better sound can be had for less.
Chris - you mention in your review that you had to do some tweaking with placement to get the system to deliver the goods. Could you detail a bit what that entailed? What was the final setup that you chose? Did you experiment with keeping the speakers close to the rear wall, as Gallo suggests they were designed for?
These speakers are high on my list, but they will nto be set up in an optimized/dedicated space. I'd like to hear much more about how they responded to differing placement etc.
Thanks
mike
baald,
Anthony Gallo offered several suggestions for me to try, which I'll list below:
1. Remove all but "known good" power conditioners from the system. According to Gallo, the Reference Stradas often reveal subtle compression artifacts and other sonic problems that some conditioners impose, leading to an overall degradation in sound quality (i.e., sound that is markedly less open-sounding, smooth, and transparent than it could be).
2. Where possible, keep speaker cables off the floor. Gallo says that, like many audiophile-grade speakers, the Reference Stradas are surprisingly sensitive to cable routing and sound much better when speaker cables are elevated a few inches up off of floor surfaces.
3. Be mindful of absolute phase with the Reference Strada; try them both with normal and reversed wiring polarity (and thus with the phase switches on the sub also flipped) to see if one approach sounds better than the other (typically one setting does sound better). Gallo advised that, because the Reference Stradas are quite phase coherent to begin with, they are, like many audiophile speakers, sensitive to absolute phase.
4. To Gallo's three suggestions above, I would also add this one: position (i.e., angle) the speakers to avoid unnecessary reflections from side walls or television screens. Feel free to use plenty of toe-in.
I used the speakers well away from the rear wall of the Playback listening room and had no problems doing so, though I probably lost a bit of bass extension from the Stradas in the process. But rest assured that Gallo took this possibility into account: hence, his very good designs for both floor stands and tabletop stands for the Stradas. I would say the Strada can be wall-mounted, but definitely do not need to be wall-mounted. If anything, I think you can minimize unwanted wall and/or screen reflections by pulling the speakers out into the room a bit.
Best, Chris Martens
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
2. Where possible, keep speaker cables off the floor. Gallo says that, like many audiophile-grade speakers, the Reference Stradas are surprisingly sensitive to cable routing and sound much better when speaker cables are elevated a few inches up off of floor surfaces.
i believe Anthony's statement needs to be qualified by stating cables should be elevated off a "carpeted" floors (static electricity).
I feel saying this applies to all floors runs way into "snake oil" arena.
Even the carpeted floor theory is hard to justify, or should I say substantiate.
It would be always helpful to have frequency vs spl measurements to buttress all the nice words describing the speakers. If one can hear it, it should be possible to measure it. Without any science, it only becomes blah, blah, blah.
Hobbs,
Let me share with you an anecdote that will perhaps explain why I think charts, graphs, and "science" won't necessarily make a good, carefully-crafted observational review (for that is what we are trying to provide here) any more accurate or reliable.
I once undertook a project to review a new high-end loudspeaker that used a somewhat unorthodox bass loading scheme. Early on in the review process I discerned that the bass output of the speaker, from about 80Hz on down, was shelved downward by about 10dB--obviously not good. I determined these deficiencies with my ears, using prior experience to project both the frequency and magnitude of the downward shelving problem. Ultimately, the problem was severe enough (and could not be corrected by any placement alternative that I could discover) that I told the manufacturer that I did not want to review his speaker. I explained the problems I had observed. The manufacturer responded (much as you have) that my observations were "just words and impressions--not 'real' science."
Rather than argue with the guy, I got out a spectrum analyzer and measured the speakers' in-room response. And what do you suppose I found? That's right, I found a -10db downward shelf in the response curve that began at about 80Hz. I relayed the analyzer data to the designer and was astonished to hear him say, "That's impossible. Your instruments must be wrong. Your biases must have affected the measurements." (My thought: Yeah, right. I telepathically instructed the spectrum analyzer to magically confirm my beliefs about the speaker's bass performance. Not.). So much for 'real' science.
Now don't get me wrong: I'm not claiming I have calibrated microphones for ears, and I'm open to the possibility that I may be off the mark in my assessments from time to time. But I try very hard to be both accurate and expressive in relaying my findings. I also do have, as do most of my colleagues at The Absolute Sound and at HiFi-Plus, a lot of hard-won experience with a wide range of audio components and with the sound of live music.
All I am trying to do is to apply that experience to give you a faithful picture of the real-world performance characteristics of the products I've sampled. I am also trying to describe the distinctive qualities and characteristics that differentiate one product from another of its type--information that is not easily conveyed through charts, graphs, and data alone.
My thought is that we listen as humans and communicate with one another as humans--not as lab instruments passing data signals to one another. At the end of the day, I do believe that what we actually do hear trumps what we think we know how to measure. This is perhaps a roundabout way of saying that we can reliably discern amazingly small differences in sound quality--differences that we don't necessarily know how to quantify or to measure. Rather than ignore our own perceptions, I think we should treat them as precious gifts--sharing them and using them as potentially valuable product assessment tools.
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
I have a pair of Stradas (plus TR-2 sub) that replaced a Von Schweikert VR-4jr that I once thought I would keep forever. All I can say is, WHOA! After an unimpressive 40 hours or so, the Stradas have brought me into the music in a way that no speaker I have owned ever has - and I've owned a lot of them - PSB, ACI, Tyler Acoustics, Dynaudio, Vandersteens, Von Schweikert and on and on. The purity of sound from the Strada is nothing short of breathtaking. I remember the first time I ever heard a Quad 53 - the way voices were just..... there, with seemingly NO artifacts or electronic haze of any kind whatsoever - well, that is exactly how these Stradas sound to me. I am very tempted to put these in my home theater as well, at least for the fronts.So for those that question the value of this piece - IMHO, properly set up, the 7K is buying you the kind of purity and goosebump-inducing sound that is by far the domain of electrostatics - try to build an all-quad system and suddenly it won't seem like all that much. To compare these speakers to your "average" PSB or similar home theater system is to do these speakers a great injustice. (I love PSB for what they do, BTW and still have a pair in a guest room).
Is the Gallo Reference Strada Satellite merely the updated tweeter/midrange section of the Reference 3.1?
No, not exactly. The Reference Strada is in fact the tweeter/midrange section of the not-yet-released Gallo Reference 3.5 floorstanding speaker. Differences include an all-new CDT 3 tweeter, revised midrange enclosures, and a number of internal changes--all of which give the Reference Strada a significantly more open and transparent sound than the Reference 3/3.1 (to my ears, the difference isn't subtle).
Thoughts on the Gallo subs.
No, the Gallo sub is not the highest output woofer you could buy for the price. However, it is very well-damped and well-controlled, goes quite low, and--most importantly--offers enough resolution and transient speed to match well with the Reference Stradas, which are extremely open and agile. The Reference Stradas are not speakers that should be matched with giant, rumblin', bumblin', mud-flapper subs; they deserve better than that.
Note that the TR-3 sub uses the same woofer that will be found in the not-yet-released Reference 3.5 speaker--a woofer that represents an improvement on the design used in the Reference 3/3.1 (though omitting the dual-drive option that the Reference 3/3.1 provides, since the TR-3 of course has its own built-in amp).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It seems that the Strada + the TR-3 = the Reference 3.5. Why does the Strada (priced at $999/each) & TR-3 (priced at $984.50/each) cost so much less than the the Reference 3.5 which are estimated to cost $3000 each? Are they not the same components? Is the 3.5's higher price tag just for its looks, style and stand?
Why would anybody pick up the Reference 3.5 for $6000. When you can pick up 2 stradas and 2 TR-3 for less than $4000 and have the versitility of better placement of your subs??
I have the package mentioned in the test and the are just beyond any speaker I have heard before, and I have heard plenty. A must-audition!
The reference 3.5 & all 3. Gallos are more expensive because of the aluminum column that the speakers are housed in.
I think the Gallo Reference 3 and 3.1s were the best bang for the buck in their class. It brought you to real high end performance without breaking the bank. Not everyone will appreciate such speakers. It does require the rest of the gear to be up to snuff. But when they do, they can sing gloriously.
I was in the market for one after my father-in-law got his. I was playing with speakers like B&Ws CDM/600 series previously and never knew what the big deal was with SACDs or with BluRay HD audio in the past. But once you've heard the 3.1s set up correctly... then you realize what you are missing.
I only went with the Thiel CS2.4 SEs because they were a better fit for my music.
In any case, I think the Stradas, which offer the essentials of the newer Reference 3.5s (the upcoming upgrade over the older 3.1s and priced significantly more than 3.1) addresses the problems with multichannel setups which really benefit from identical drivers/speakers if you want a more seamless pan and enveloping environment. With new music BluRays, IMHO, this will be an even more critical.
In my home, I can't fit 5.1 identical speakers if they are the size of the Reference 3.1s. My Thiels are even worse.
But the Stradas can. Heck, if you really want a full 11.x channel system with DSX/IIz, these will fit the bill. To a perfect T.
I have changed my Reference 3.1 with Mapleshade Stand for a pair (5 indeed but still I haven't the AV amp) of Strada and a TR3 subwoofer, and I am amazed with the sound, much MUCH better than the 3.1 in all ways, transparency, detail, soundstage, treble, medium even the bass although not so low than the 3.1 is better, more correct and detail, and with the adition of TR3 the low bass is awesome. The Reference 3.1 was an excellent speakers but the Strada are incredible.
In the centre speaker, would the tweeter be better served if it was placed above the 2 round woofers instead of just turned 90 degrees. eg
T instead of W T W
W W